The Bears have been contacted about bringing Marty Booker back to Chicago and I think a lot of us would welcome that return with open arms. Book was a professional receiver with terrific hands and would provide an Amani Toomer-like security blanket to whatever disaster is playing quarterback for this team.
What do I love about this the most? Brian Urlacher is apparently pitching the organization to sign him according to Brad Biggs. For a team that seemed desperate for offensive leadership and revealed with great honesty how much they missed Thomas Jones in 2007, any move that makes the locker room a comfortable place is a good move.
Here's what Booker had to say about being traded:
"I took it hard, real hard, when I got traded. You know, I had just signed that nice contract and I didn’t expect to be out of there like that. I hold no grudges against anybody. You can’t do that in this business ever, you can’t go bite the hand that fed you. Everything comes full circle and I was never going to trash those guys. I need a job. That’s an opportunity there."
To quote a little musical about the French revolution...bring him home.
#2 Rancid said . . .done, bring back book!
February 13, 2008
#3 JB said . . .I understand why Booker isn't useful in Miami. He only has 2-3 years left and the Dolphins won't be contenders that soon. I'm not sure why the Tuna didn't try to trade him, I would think he could have gotten something. Booker is that solid receiver type we need desperately. I think this is no brainer.
For those who worry about signing the off-cast of a 1-15 club, don't. This is Parcells making a splash. Booker was solid for them but at 32 he won't still be there when the rest of the team catches up. Booker had a decent year playing with Cleo Lemon and Beck (and we think Rex/BG/KO was lousy). He also saw a lot fewer balls later in the season as the fins desperately tried to use Ginn a lot to cover up one of the biggest draft mistakes they've had in a while. Booker will do well on this club if we have the brains to "bring him home".
Nice on the Les Mis by the way. I've seen it on Broadway and in London. Easily my favorite of all time.
February 13, 2008
#4 jeff said . . .just went through and read the Biggs article...yeah, I can't see how walker and miller are on this roster next year. Interesting how booker could essentially make it probably to cut moose. I loved booker when he played for us and was a little shocked at the trade when it happened...but I like wale and now we could possibly get him back. I'm all for it and it gives us a little more flexibility going forward at WR.
February 13, 2008
#5 Pissed Off said . . .if you let me choose booker or moose, i take booker, even if i'm the only one in the world who does. i can't watch moose drop any more easy balls and collect thirteen millions bucks for it.
February 13, 2008
#6 Phil from SATX said . . .Fine, bring him back. He's basically Moose is he not? Except that he will be more a team guy instead of a "me" guy like Moose throwing everyone under the bus like the drops arent his fault. At least Booker will shut Moose up a bit with his veteran leadership. If we get Booker does this mean we wont make any run at BB.....fine with me.
Jeff, you cant have it both ways, either you like Rex or you dont. I get your subtle shots at the QB (that means Rex) all the time. You've talked about him throwing for 400 and how he can be efficient and then you throw shots all the time. He's not a disaster, just have it one way or the other, you like the guy and you want him to play or you dont. Stop with the shots at him or cut off all praise and when he plays great all next year and we go to the SB AGAIN I'll rub it in your face. It just gets old...every post you take a shot at the guy.
And BTW, I'll take Booker over Moose as well.
February 13, 2008
#7 JB said . . .Very interesting, Jeff, I had the exact same reaction to reading the Biggs story, particularly about the Urlacher connection. I got excited - we had a near-complete chemistry breakdown last year, with many different contributing factors but led by the TJ offseason move. We need to regain our chemistry.
I think Booker would go a long way there, and I think an aggressive re-signing of Rex will help too. I can't help but believe that with the way Moose was so willing to throw people on the team under the bus, he couldn't have been that much beloved. I'll take a Marty Booker instead, and hope to get a great leader and teammate and mentor, as well as a guy who won't drop balls that come his way. If it excites Brian, it excites me. It doesn't change the need to still hammer down a #1, but it will help our team.
100%, do it. You're far from the only one, Jeff. This looks like a no-brainer. Also enjoying reading about the hard looks going towards Faneca. Just wait, guys - everything we want to happen is going to happen. We'll still end up losing Briggs, very very sad, but we're going to start next season with a cemented-in Rex, a nothing-but-straight-up-100% improved o-line, Marty Booker teaching Devin Hester and Mark Bradley, a new RB who we're absolutely going to love for attitude alone, a rehabbed Ced who realizes he's going to have to drop the Johnny Depp/Willy Wonka persona weirdness and play like a teammate, watch out! Worst to first is a distinct possibility.
Walker's gone, Miller's gone, R. Brown's gone, Berrian's gone, Brigg's gone, Arch D gone, maybe R. Manning gone, and only one of those will I miss. We'll be better better better, much better, in 2008. I think the 2007 blessing in disguise will be in how clear the needs were. If Arch and the O-line weren't so desperately bad, Angelo might have been misdirected. But he was able to realize that Rex wasn't the problem, that Ced wasn't entirely the problem (although he needs help), that Berrian wasn't necessarily the only solution, and that wholesale changes aren't needed for the D. He gets it, I'm sure he does.
The individual names that join our team may not be our first choices, but the order of triage will be. No Bear team is taking Andre Woodson with the first pick. And for those who are grudgingly conceding that the BT needs to do at least a 2-3 year incentive-laden deal for Rex, did you actually think that a lesser deal could actually happen? Like, yeah Rex, we'll give you one year for $200K but you can earn up to $8MM if you play well - then we'll see after that? Sound good to you, man?
If there is one thing I am now completely convinced of, it's that the one name who is not negotiable is Rex Grossman. As someone said, if he's not there, we can basically write off 2008. So will there be some overpayment potential with Rex? Yes, and that's fine - I rather overpay him than overpay Bernard Berrian - Rex is a little more important to our future than Beri-Overrat-ian. Look for a 3 year, $18MM deal with a 1 year option that has about $8MM guaranteed. Don't be shocked when that happens. Next year you'll be glad it did.
February 13, 2008
#8 Al in WI said . . .phil, cut that meat! bringing the good stuff today. i love the enthusiasm and bearamism.
jeff, I think that's a lot of votes for booker and against moose on this site, i put my name on that list.
po'd...love the fire, but jeff can walk the line, rex has potential but needs to play up to it. i don't think jeff is saying anything a lot of us aren't thinking.
February 13, 2008
#9 North Dakota Sucks said . . .I'm on board. Trading Booker was a mistake, if they intended to dump A-Train the next offseason then he should have been the one traded in '04. But anyway, as pointed out Booker had crap qb's in Miami not to mention a poor coaching staff last season.
He is a major upgrade over Moose in just about every way. Better hands, quicker and faster, and a much better locker room guy.
If I'm not mistaken Rex's first career td pass was a 50 yard bomb to none other then Marty Booker against Washington on the lakefront. That was a beauty.
I don't think this move would really effect BB in anyway. This move would replace Moose with a cheaper better option. The #1 slot is still undecided.February 13, 2008
#10 Phil from SATX said . . .Marty Booker is 32 years old with heavy mileage. I'd like to know where his skill level stands before I hop on the bandwagon to bring him back. We've got enough shit at wide receiver without adding more.
Brian Urlacher should shut the fuck up when it comes to lobbying for other problems. Buy a fucking condom and make your child support payments Brian. Nice father figure you are.
February 13, 2008
#11 JB said . . .It's great to be a Chicago Bear fan, isn't it Mike?
Oh wait, I forgot, you're not a fan. In fact, you hate the Chicago Bears. Did your mom and dad get eaten by a bear sometime in your deep dark past? Was Henry Waechter rude to you when you were a child? Did you lose your wife, children and house due to a bet on the 2007 Super Bowl? Did Brian Urlacher sleep with your wife?
What happened to you, Mike? I'm really curious.
February 13, 2008
#12 Pissed Off said . . .Again, we care what type of guys they are on the field and in the locker room. As long as they stay out of jail off the field, i could care less.
Urlacher has a big time right to voice his opinion on who he'd like to see brought in to win a championship. Make no mistake, he is our franchise player. We have a chance to win a super bowl next year because we have 54 on our team. If he likes booker, and would like to see him back, i think it's good to know as a bears fan and if i'm JA, i take that statement to the bank and get a deal done. While I'm at it, i ask him if he wants to bring in anyone else. or get rid of anyone. why not create a little good will on this team after getting rid of a clubhouse favorite in TJ?
February 13, 2008
#13 jeff said . . .Mike...you must be one of Urlachers illegitimate children. Sorry you daddy left you. Sorry he didnt love you. But based on what we know about you I dont think any of us can honestly blame him for kicking you to the curb at a young age.
February 13, 2008
#14 Megan said . . .i love whoever is playing quarterback for the bears, as i hope people realize. but i'm not going to blindly support bad performances. like rex or don't like rex, the bears havent had a reliable quarterback in 22 years and even he missed seven starts en route to a title
February 13, 2008
#15 Max said . . .Gawd I love this site!
Bring on the love!
I think Mike is calling the kettle black there boys.
Book'em Dano!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
XXOO
MeganFebruary 14, 2008
#16 Rancid said . . .I like it. Booker had a 100 receptions for us in 2001 and 97 the next year, which got him a ticket to the pro bowl. Sure he has aged, but bringing in another dependable receiver can't hurt. He doesn't drop alot of passes which plagued our receivers this year. And no matter how old he gets, his freakishly large hands will still be able to palm my head, and thus should be able to hold on to the ball. . . Moose, take notes.
February 14, 2008
#17 Phil from SATX said . . .Shit. Fargas just re-signed with Oakland
February 14, 2008
#18 Phil from SATX said . . .Oh well, like we said, the names will change but you'll still be optimistic about the new Bear running back. Who're the other free agents? Not too interested in a Julius Jones, but maybe I should be... We know how his older brother continued improving year after year in his career...
I'm still thinking the quasi RB/fullback might be perfect for us - the Owen Schmitt, Peyton Hillis or Jacob Hester - big bruisers with speed that can be teamed with both Ced and Wolfe, plus be continually employed as a blocker in place of the increasingly-discredited Jason McKie. These guys are later rounders who will reportedly add huge value vis a vis their draft position.
Does anyone here think the new RB has to be a free agent?
February 14, 2008
#19 JB said . . .Owen Schmitt is 6'2", 250 with a 4.49 40 low time, and a killer blocker. Even though he's the best fullback in the draft, he's still not projected to go until the 4th. How about him blocking for Benson in between Kreutz and Alan Faneca, and then being handed the ball for 20 himself? Worth our second 3rd round pick? Sounds pretty good!
February 14, 2008
#20 Phil from SATX said . . .I like the idea Phil. Here's a random question, if Booker resigns and we already have Alex Brown, will we have the two biggest sets of hands in the league? I forgot how freakishly large booker's hands are, and I've been talking about AB's for a long time.
Anyways, anxiously awaiting free agency. Happy Valentines day to Megan, Nicole, and all the other wonderful ladies on this site.
February 14, 2008
#21 DTB said . . .I'm going to give us something to talk about today. I was on da Site getting my Chalk Talk fix and saw a question about our past 1st round drafting of O linemen. There's been 8, and only 2 since the Super Bowl season - the famous Stan Thomas debacle, and Marc Columbo.
Did you realize that we drafted two O linemen in the first round within 3 years - Keith Van Horne in 1981 and Jimbo Covert in 1983? There was a reason that '85 line was so great. We HAVE to get back to that. We'll start this year, I think.
That led me to a search of 1st round draft picks in recent memory. There is a very interesting trend there, it seems. I'm going to post them in chronological order, with year and # selected after - starting with people who impacted the '85 SB -
1979 Dan Hampton 4th pick, Al Harris 9
1980 Otis Wilson 19
1981 Keith Van Horne 11
1982 Jim McMahon 5
1983 Jimbo Covert 6, Willie Gault 18
1984 Wilbur Marshall 11
1985 Fridge Perry 22Let's stop right there and digest that. Whoever was managing the selections during this period - was it Jim Finks? - ought to be every bit as famous as Mike Ditka. Could you do any better for 1st round drafting?
1986 Neal Anderson 27
1987 Jim Harbaugh 26
1988 Brad Muster 23
1989 Donnell Woolford 11, Trace Armstrong 12
1990 Mark Carrier 6Let's stop again. I'd give those picks pretty good grades - not equivalent to the SB guys, but notice we're consistently picking higher. Still, all good players.
Now the fun begins.
1991 Stan Thomas 22
1992 Alonzo Spellman 22
1993 Curtis Conway 7
1994 John Thierry 11
1995 Rashaan Salaam 21
1996 Walt Harris 13
1997 No Pick
1998 Curtis Enis 5
1999 Cade McNown 12STOP. Are you seeing a pattern here? Do you now know why the Bears SUCKED throughout the 1990's? Walt Harris was the ONLY non-bust pick here, you could argue for the non-underwear-crazed Spellman (actually I guess you couldn't given that necessary compound adjective). Was that Mark Hatley? Who was responsible here?
Let's keep going, this is fun.
2000 Brian Urlacher 9 (FINALLY!)
2001 David Terrell 8 (oops, we're not done yet)
2002 Marc Columbo 29
2003 Michael Haynes 14 (we're definitely not out of the woods) Rex Grossman 22
2004 Tommie Harris 14 (Yay!)
2005 Cedric Benson 4 (Boo!)
2006 NO PICK
2007 Greg Olsen 31 (finishing on a high note!)Definite mixed bag in the post-millenium. 2 bona fide busts in David Terrell and Michael Haynes, 1 bust in the making in Ced, 2 and maybe 3 Hall of Fame picks (I'm counting on you GO!). But clearly way beyond the historic level of futility in the 1990's.
We're going to hear an Olineman called this year, who knows next year. Time to REBUILD THAT LINE!
I found this interesting, hope you did too.
February 14, 2008
#22 Rancid said . . .Dominic Rhodes, anyone? Likely cut.
February 14, 2008
#23 Rancid said . . .Phil - I like the rookie fullback idea, but it does come with a risk. It means we don't draft a RB. Many mocks have us taking a RB in the first 3 rounds. So that would allow us to wait until our last 3rd or our 4th to solve that sitaution by picking a FB. I like this because then we can use those picks on other spots. The downer is that if it doesn't work then we have a repeat of the RB situation of this year. Yuck. The only one of the three FB's you mentioned that I've really had a chance to watch was Hester. He did look the part in the three games I watched and with a name like Hester . . . Overall, I would say go for it. Don't sign a FA RB and draft one of these FB/RB types instead of a true RB. I like the gamble. Of course, I've also lost a lost of dough gambling over the years.
As far as O Linemen go, I still think JA will use FA more than the draft. I still like 2 FA pickups, a high end guard and a mid level LT, and then trading out of our 1st rounder for someone's second and third round picks. We will then still get a great prospective LT in the second round who could compete for a starting spot and still have another 2nd round pick as well as 3 3rd rounders to use on other needs. I truly think this is better than a pick at 14. It's not sexy to trade your first rounder but I just think it makes sense this year with the amount of positions we need.
February 14, 2008
#24 Jimbo said . . .DTB - Rhodes - NO
February 14, 2008
#25 Phil from SATX said . . .Good post on #20 Phil.
February 14, 2008
#26 beardown1982 said . . .I did a little more research - Hatley was responsible for the late 90's busts (but also can be credited with picking Urlacher, Mike Brown, Tillman and Briggs). Before 97, guess who was doing the picking - WANNY!!!!!!
AUGHGGGGHHHHH!!@!!!!!
Thanks a lot Michael McCaskey. And before I ever hear another word out of Mike about the "McCaskets", I think we all here owe a huge vote of thanks and a vow of eternal loyalty to Virginia McCaskey, who had the BALLS to fire her own son because of how he was ruining the team. She promoted Phillips in the '99 offseason, and we have to be eternally grateful to her for doing so. He brought JA in 2001, and despite our collective disappointment in the 2007 season, and subsequent picking apart of draft/FA strategies ("JA can't draft O" for example), I think we can all agree that the Bears have been better for getting JA.
Virginia did the toughest thing a mother can be asked to do - firing her own child. I will never forget that, nor should any other Bear fan.
February 14, 2008
#27 Phil from SATX said . . .Seems like a no brainer...as long as you get rid of Moose as well. Book is physical too..so he will help block just as much as moose did. (maybe the only thing he did consistantly in chicago)
I was sad to see Book go when the trade happened, but saw the trade a necessary. Would be nice to have him back in a Bears uniform if he comes cheap enough.
February 14, 2008
#28 Al in WI said . . .Rancid, I'm okay with doing as you suggest, as long as we are getting equivalent players in FA. Before I get too wrapped up with the concept that our own history shows a Super Bowl is made by successful drafting (and especially successful first round drafting), I have to remind myself that all that occurred before the era of free agency. There was no other way to get good players other than the draft.
I did my own quick analysis on the 2nd round picks, and you usually can get excellent players there, and even in the 3rd round. Much more of a crap shoot after that if you're looking for starters.
Some notable Bears 2nd rounders:
Mike Singletary 1981 10
Ron Rivera 1984 16
Bobby Engram 1996 22
Mike Brown 2000 8
Devin Hester 2006 25Not very many notables, actually.
How about 3rd rounders?
Dave Duerson 1983 8
Jerry Fontenot 1989 9
Jim Flanigan 1994 9
Olin Kreutz 1998 3
Marty Booker 1999 17 (come back Marty!)
Lance Briggs 2003 4
Bernard Berrian 2004 15 (see, we can get another BB with a 3rd rounder)
Dusty Dvoracek 2006 9Good guys available in these rounds, several Hof F or future HoF'ers.
Who will our next not-yet-drafted future HoF'er be?
One more note - only one year in this time period did we trade out of the first, and for that we got... Devin Hester. I'd say that one worked out.
The other year we didn't pick, 1997, was when the Certified Genius Wannstedt traded our first round pick for Rick Mirer. Then he traded up to get John Allred, TE, in the 2nd, and took Bob Sapp in the 3rd who ended up cutting cut during training camp. Wanny was stripped of his personnel duties immediately after the draft and Hatley was hired.
Bottom line - not much corporate experience here in trading out of the first, but the one time we tried it, BOOYA!!!!!
So I'm okay with doing it again.
February 14, 2008
#29 Phil from SATX said . . .Phil, The Bears front office went something like this:
Finks 1975-1982 (Hired by Halas)
Jerry Vanisi from 1982-1986 (Halas
Bill Tobin From 1987-1993
No GM from '93 to '01. Wanny called the shots with some weak player personel guys during that time, until Hatley was brought in '97 or '98 during the season.
I've always felt the decision to fire Vanisi was the move that ultimately brought down the Bears dynasty. It's been widely reported in books over the years the he and Ditka were on the same page, but Tobin and Ditka weren't. Tobin followed the lead of Micheal.
Your point holds though, even though the picks for '86-'90 were solid, they weren't great players with the exception of Neal Anderson.February 14, 2008
#30 jeff said . . .Thanks Al. Definitely the Michael/Wanny duo killed us, although to be fair that WAS the heyday of the hot head coach prospects demanding control over personnel. Hatley was somewhat better, but still made plenty of errors. I think your assessment is probably right - Vainisi was the real deal, Tobin presided over an era that was pretty good, but not good enough, and then they picked a HORRIBLE head coach and gave him enough power to ruin things for a half decade. I'll never forget how horrible it was to watch the replacement of Buddy Ryan with Vince Tobin, complete with his "read and react" (aka BORRRRRING!) defense. We just worked our way back into mediocrity after having the greatest team ever.
Still think this current management team is the best since Vainisi. Like we've all said, Jerry and Ted will be earning their money this year. I am hopeful that one year of hubris from Lovie Smith was earned - and now fully spent - and the now-humbled Lovie will be a better Lovie. Along with JA and TP keeping a MUCH closer eye on things and a MUCH shorter leash.
February 14, 2008
#31 Rancid said . . .dolphins set to release zach thomas. not too much tread left on those tires.
February 14, 2008
#32 Phil from SATX said . . .It appears that Jamal Lewis and Cleveland are struggling to agree on a contract. reportedly Lewis wants to stay there but Cleveland won't give him more than a 2 year deal. He wants at least 3. Anyone think he's worth a 3 year deal in Chicago? With Fargas re-signing in Oakland I am suddenly interested in other FA RBs. I am not sold on Turner and Fargas was my main target.
February 14, 2008
#33 Rancid said . . .Here's some comments found trolling around on Jamal Lewis
From a Browns blog:
Not taking anything away from Jamal, he did a fantastic job. But he is a one-dimensional back now, completely reliant on loosening of the run D by way of K2 and Braylon's abilities.
He has very little cutback ability, and his vision seems to be limited to the g/c gaps (I haven't seen him take advantage of Thomas' speed on the outside except for the one long run I recall he did at a Home game).
From a discussion about, of all things, his football rookie card value prospects:
But Lewis was arrested on a charge of attempting to distribute cocaine, forced to serve some prison time and suspended by the NFL for the first two games of the 2004 season.
He returned and managed two more 1000-yard seasons for the Ravens, but he clearly hasn't been the same back, averaging less than four yards per carry and ripping off far fewer long runs as he played through a number of nagging injuries. Released by the Ravens in February 2007, he signed with the rival Cleveland Browns a week later.
From another Browns blog:
Say what you will about his rushing yardage totals or yards per carry. These statistics are almost meaningless without context. Throw in the context (which is what DVOA and DPAR do, by the way) and Lewis looks no better than Ron Dayne or a thousand other scrubs.
There is the fact that among running backs, Jmal Lewis appears to be one of the worst. There is also the fact (and I know Alex and I don't always see eye to eye on this) that running backs--even good ones--do not make good investments of resources, whether we're talking about free agent dollars or draft picks, because hey, even a star (like Edgerrin James) can't succeed without an offensive line, while plenty of scrubs (see any Denver Bronco since 1999) can put up star numbers with a good offensive line.
[end of commentary]
The whole DVOA and DPAR concept is fascinating. MikeB take note. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php
Anyway, quickish research says no to JL.
February 14, 2008
#34 Rancid said . . .Good work Phil. I knew he had a resurgent year but wondered if it was due to a good line. Seems like the Browns line is now being credited with DA's success and that of Lewis. I think that's totally believable considering they both had better years than they should have. The "RB to compete with/complement Ced"search continues.
February 14, 2008
#35 serious. said . . .Some of us had also mentioned Travelle Wharton as a possible FA LT pickup. He just re-signed with the Panthers. With several guys seeming likely to be franchise tagged and maybe a few others re-signing early, the large amount of O linemen we thought were going to be available could possibly dry up. If that becomes the case I would probably abandon my theory that we should sign 2 FA linemen.
February 14, 2008
#36 Jimbo said . . .Book would be a nice pickup, for the right price.
On a different note, what do people think about taking a guy like John Stewart (Oregon) in the 2nd or 3rd round?? that guy is a beast.
I'm gonna turn this whole draft deal on its head and go: 1) Phillps (S).. i really think he'll be around at #14, 2) RB/OT, 3) OT/RB, 4)LB/WR/DT ... and so on.
February 14, 2008
#37 Jimbo said . . .Here is an article from NFL.com's Pat Kirwan on the deep RB class about to hit the league. He breaks them down as follows...
Group One
1. Darren McFadden, Arkansas
2. Jonathan Stewart, Oregon
3. Rashard Mendenhall, Illinois
Group Two
1. Jamaal Charles, Texas
2. Ray Rice, Rutgers
3. Felix Jones, Arkansas
4. Steve Slaton, West Virginia
Group Three
1. Chris Johnson, East Carolina
2. Mike Hart, Michigan
3. Kevin Smith, Central FloridaAlso, here's an interesting quote from the article regarding RB FA Michael Turner, "[Kirwan] asked one offensive coordinator about his running back situation, which is poor to say the least, and he said, "Only one team is going to get Michael Turner from the Chargers in free agency, but the more tape I watch, the less concerned I am if we don't get him."
Alright, I know I'm saying this after that quote, but during Turner's very average performance in SD's loss at New England, I couldn't help but think he reminded me of a certain back we know all too well. It starts with a "B" and ends with an "enson."
Some team is going to overpay for Tuner. I hope it ain't us.
February 15, 2008
#38 Shady McBears Fan said . . .Afore mentioned article...
http://www.nfl.com/draft/story?id=09000d5d806a9e6c&template=with-video&confirm=true
February 15, 2008
#39 Shady said . . .Free Agency anybody?
http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10636763
Interesting potential pick-ups:
Jacob Bell, G, Tennessee Titans: He has developed into a power player for the Titans. He is part of a good offensive line that doesn't get the attention it deserves. He has 31 starts the past two seasons.
Ryan Lilja, G, Indianapolis Colts: He has developed into a good player the past two years and he is a big reason the Colts' running game has improved. The way guards got paid last year, he will get his this time around.
Bryant Johnson, WR, Arizona Cardinals: He is the third receiver in Arizona, so bringing him back is a luxury. The Cardinals want to keep him but it might be tough. He has good speed. He caught 46 passes and made eight starts last season.
D.J. Hackett, WR, Seattle Seahawks: He played in only six games due to injury, but he is 26 and was being counted on as a big part of the Seattle offense. In one three-game span in November, he had 23 catches for 294 yards and three scores.
Eugene Wilson, S, New England Patriots: He has started 55 games the past five seasons, playing both corner and safety. He started six games last season and has range for a team looking for a free safety.
Stacy Andrews, T-G, Cincinnati Bengals: He can play both guard and tackle and filled in nicely last year when injuries hit Willie Anderson. Andrews moved to right tackle and played well.
Sean Locklear, RT, Seattle Seahawks: He has 42 starts the past three seasons at right tackle. In a league where there aren't a lot of them, he has some value. He's another 26-year-old player.
Maurice Williams, T-G, Jacksonville Jaguars: He was benched as the team's right tackle this season when the Jags signed Tony Pashos, but Williams played well when he started the final two months at guard. He can play both positions, which will help his value.
Max Starks, T, Pittsburgh Steelers: He was a starter at right tackle in the Super Bowl season of 2005 and in 2006, but lost his job this season in camp. When injuries hit, he moved to left tackle and played well. He's a huge man at 6-8 and 335 pounds. He did end the season on IR with a knee injury, but it isn't serious.
Jake Scott, G, Indianapolis Colts: He has started 48 games the past three seasons for a good offense. And he's only 26. At 290 pounds, he's not big enough to play in all systems.
February 15, 2008
#40 Shady said . . .Hey...
Didn't the Dolphins also release former Bear Keith Traylor? Remember when he ended up with that interception and almost died running it back! Classic.
February 15, 2008
#41 Z said . . .MIDWAY SIGHTING:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOzJv8NlWOk&feature=related
Look closely for the guy in orange running towards Brett Favre...
February 15, 2008
#42 Z said . . .I just read that Chris Harris (traded by BT for a 5th round pick) led the NFL in forced fumbles with 8, had 102 tackles and quickly became the anchor at the safety position in his first season with the Panthers.
I know that hindsight is easy 4 all of us 2 make great calls on others choices but I'm starting to worry as much about who the BT lets go (cough, cough T. Jones, sorry hard to let go, leadership and being clutch are very valuable things, oh yeah blocking is a pretty cool thing in the NFL 4 your players to do also)
And the BS that they couldn't get along sharing the load, let them bitch, bitch all the way to the SB, winning minimizes such problems and I believe the right decision would have seemed clearer by the end of this last season. U never trade a proven commodity for potential. If he'd had such a great season and didn't sign a long extension we could have used the tag on him next year which it looks like we won't end up using this year
And throw the ball to Greg Olsen. Sometimes choices really are that easy. Just do it.
February 15, 2008
#43 Z said . . .Oh I forgot and for $13.3 million over the next five years.
And Fred Miller will count almost $5 Mill towards the cap next year. He better not get that.
February 15, 2008
#44 JB said . . .And Faneca would be like $7 or maybe $8 Mill. Show him the $$
February 15, 2008
#45 Phil from SATX said . . .yeah, i was never on m. turner. i like the possibility of a 2nd round RB for this one. You know it's interesting, I didn't think the chris harris trade was a big deal at the time...but I guess a lot of that hinged on AA...I swallowed that tripe.
There are definitely some good FA options out there and I think we'll be making a splash. Bryant Johnson has a lot of talent, just hasn't produced much behind boldin and fitz...but those two are really really good. Lots of OL still out there including the big fish. I'd love to solve some of our problems before the draft...OL would be a great one to have figured out.
February 15, 2008
#46 Pissed Off said . . .Z, I loved that post. I think you're right - never trade a proven commodity for potential - maybe modified to say at least not voluntarily. Of course, it could be argued that Ced had already proven quite a bit towards the end of that season - but take away the threat of Jones, age that old line a little more, and challenge Ced to be an everydown back and it pretty much all went to shit.
The Chris Harris deal - well not only did I not see the results of that coming, I was one who was all for getting rid of him. I always liked Todd Johnson, wanted to keep him, but who wasn't onboard with the Arch signing given what we knew at the time? Harris was a good teammate, I just apparently underrated his upside and I'm glad for him that he's doing well because he was a good Bear.
Z, like you said, sometimes choices are just that easy - throw the ball to Olsen. Could have said the same thing about Hester, about Mark Bradley, about Garrett Wolfe. I still think those easy choices were out there in terms of sitting the Oline players who weren't performing - don't wait until you have to see the severed arm lying on the ground to make a change. And could you just go ahead and play a Hass and a Beekman at the end of the season when all has long since been lost?
Sometimes choices are easy... but some people make them seem so hard. Hey Rat Bastard, you know who I'm talking to, don't you! And since the D side of the ball WAS willing to make changes (made probably too many of them, but at least they benched under-performing players) - it seems pretty obvious that it's Ronny boy who was so stubborn with his personnel and no one else.
Lots of O coordinators fired this year, some who had better offensive production than us. For the life of me...
February 15, 2008
#47 Phil from SATX said . . .Very upset to hear Fargas re-signed with Oaktown. What the hell are they gonna do with Lamont Jordan and Dominick Rhodes now? I guess the RB situation is going to be the same again this year. Ced, AP, Wolfe and rookie to compete in camp....sigh.
I wish we'd sign Booker and get that deal done but that guy WILL NOT solve all of our problems. We still need to get a guy in free agency, not a guy that we'll never use like Eddie Berlin but a guy like D.J. Hackett who will actually make an impact. Then we can save $$ and let Berrian walk. He can drop some other QBs passes next year.
Pick up at least one proven O-lineman in free agency and draft a couple more.
February 15, 2008
#48 Phil from SATX said . . .I know I'm rehashing old stuff, ripping open old scabs, I'll try to stop...
IIWII
(it is what it is)
On to the positive! I liked the groupings of RBs and would really like to get someone from that second group. Worried about Jamaal's injury history at UT - he always seemed like he'd get dinged up and be out for games, and that's in college. But Ray Rice, Felix Jones, Slaton - I bet any one of those guys could deliver what we need next year - and do so at much lower cost than M Turner. I feel certain we won't make any serious runs at him, and I completely agree with that anonymous Browns blogger I quoted - it's all about the line, baby.
You could reference Z's line about proven vs. potential re: the Briggs re-signing, but the fact is, that would simply be too much money tied up in LBs, especially when we have so much tied up in CBs. I though about whether cutting or trading HH would be a possibility, but he only has cap value of $1.5MM this year - I thought he made more than that. Is the not going balls out on Briggs the next "move not made" move that we're going to be lamenting next year?
February 15, 2008
Marty should be pretty cheap - so maybe he doesn't count, and we go after DJ Hackett, who won't be cheap but won't be the most expensive guy out there either - how'd you feel about going into next year with Hackett, Booker, Hester, Bradley, Davis and a late round rookie?
I think I'd feel pretty dang good about that. PO'd, don't get too wrapped up in Fargas. He's just one guy - not the only answer. Names will change, brother, names will change. By the way, the Wharton re-signing gives lie to my theory that no free agent-to-be would re-sign without testing the market. So maybe we should be a little more pissed at our camp for not hearing some news about Rex or BA.
February 15, 2008
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.